Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Andrew Reid

"Canon killed 1D C after just 9 months"

Recommended Posts

EOSHD Pro Color for Sony cameras EOSHD Pro LOG for Sony Cameras

@Andrew Reid

Quote

With these video features on stills cameras, has it really hurt sales to photographers who don’t care about video? No

Very interesting, as I take a look on this aspect since beginning of 2017: 11 big events (big political press conferences with 50+ Journalists and filming/broacasting teams, "Bundesliga" - games of the first German soccer league, etc.) on my screen, 99% all dominated mainly by Canon and Nikon on second place. Sony was TWO times in the bag of photo journalists...But in the bag only, the owners didn't want "to rely on them".

Therefore I talked on each event with 30-35 journalists owning a camera about Sony. Even now - as the A9 is released some months and it is without doubt a great camera - German speaking journalists don't use or trust Sony cameras. Interesting: 53 % didn't ever know, that Sony had a new camera for photo journalism (A9)...

As of video, Sony and Pana (small sensor) camcorders or pro broadcasting cameras are leading. I just took a look to my statistic records and I counted 2 C100, three 5D m3 from January 2017 till now for filming...Above this I saw four times people filming with a 1DX m2 or 5D m4. When asked, they told me to film 1080p with their devices.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am still an avid 1DC user mainly because it hits my checklist of needs and I love the image science. The sad truth is Canon will continue to dance around in the market between DSLR and 'Video Cameras' never truly creating a reliable roadmap for the user. Canon is the kid in school with all the potential but never applies himself fully.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 1dc was whacked partly because of the success of the Cinema line, which seemed to catch everyone by surprise. They went from a new entry to a dominant player in a very short amount of time.

And it didn't make sense to continue it when the 1dx2 was released. The 1dx2 is clearly the replacement as its a better stills camera than the original and a better video camera than the 1dc. The decision to bump the 1dx2's video spec was obviously made early on since development takes years, leaving the 1dc to twist in the wind.

It was a cool idea that got overrun by its larger C100/300 siblings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

Very interesting, as I take a look on this aspect since beginning of 2017: 11 big events (big political press conferences with 50+ Journalists and filming/broacasting teams, "Bundesliga" - games of the first German soccer league, etc.) on my screen, 99% all dominated mainly by Canon and Nikon on second place. Sony was TWO times in the bag of photo journalists...But in the bag only, the owners didn't want "to rely on them".

I covered the European Championships in horse racing, jumping, dressage, etc. A full week.
Among the pro shooters there where 1 using mirrorless. Me.

All others had Canon. I walked around the whole arena and spotted maybe 5 Nikon. The rest was Canon.
0 Sony. 0 Panasonic.

36692368462_6205483265_k.thumb.jpg.a3f4d908e8be5d3b5899ade577bdd13e.jpg

36723631271_234a2231a8_k.thumb.jpg.eaf7e94bf0fe048e3591fb72b42cec0f.jpg

Among the friends and family of the riders, their coaches, etc there where some others. 1 Olympus, 3-4 Panasonic.
And surprisingly at least 5 DJI Osimo or what ever its called..

And I understand them 100%. My Fuji X-Pro2 and X-T20 worked perfectly to capture the action. But that is because I know where the horses will be. Where they will turn, jump and so on.

DSCF2039.thumb.jpg.c9cf84c79f65369b3595de825907bcc1.jpg


But these guys and gals (lots of women pro photographers among horses) might have to capture a soccer game tomorrow. And then the tracking of my Fuji wouldn't cut it. I worked covering the veterinarians and have not need for fast action.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Trek of Joy said:

And it didn't make sense to continue it when the 1dx2 was released. The 1dx2 is clearly the replacement as its a better stills camera than the original and a better video camera than the 1dc. The decision to bump the 1dx2's video spec was obviously made early on since development takes years, leaving the 1dc to twist in the wind.

I don't consider removing features like Canon LOG a committed spec bump for video users. The 1DX II is the kid at school who could have been president if only he did his homework.

1 hour ago, Arikhan said:

@Andrew Reid

Therefore I talked on each event with 30-35 journalists owning a camera about Sony. Even now - as the A9 is released some months and it is without doubt a great camera - German speaking journalists don't use or trust Sony cameras. Interesting: 53 % didn't ever know, that Sony had a new camera for photo journalism (A9)...

As of video, Sony and Pana (small sensor) camcorders or pro broadcasting cameras are leading. I just took a look to my statistic records and I counted 2 C100, three 5D m3 from January 2017 till now for filming...Above this I saw four times people filming with a 1DX m2 or 5D m4. When asked, they told me to film 1080p with their devices.

So two things going on here... the market for professional photo journalists and sports shooters... And the market for consumer electronics and televisions.

In the photo journalist market Canon and Nikon rule and it is very hard to break the deadlock, props for Sony to try with the A9 but it's a first effort in a VERY long haul, especially to break the stranglehold of the Canonikon lenses.

The consumer electronics market, the 1DX and D5 are nowhere, they don't often appear in shops or even on Amazon, and that is where 4K is most important for Sony and Panasonic, because it doesn't just sell cameras, it sells TVs and other AV equipment as well.

Canon don't make TVs so they don't think they need to be a part of the market.

Where this will hurt them is with the pro video and rental market, and with us enthusiasts... They are dropping the ball. The C300 II wasn't as successful vs the FS7 and FS7 II, as Canon would have hoped for, and it has already had a big price drop or two. The C300 is old, past it, people are selling them in large quantities... how do I know that? Because the used price has fallen so much (increased supply vs falling demand). The C200 II is the real replacement for the C300 but the reception has been lukewarm and the codec isn't competitive vs Sony. Perhaps they will drop the C300 II price further or quickly bring out a Mk III instead and drop the C200 down a peg.

The reason the C-EOS camcorders are going to struggle due to poor video on Canon DSLR range is complex but all to do with the eco-system of EOS bodies, EF lenses, halo effect, marketing, brand perception, upgrade paths, up-selling, enthusiasts turning pro, all sorts of factors.

Canon need to get a grip and fast.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@Mattias Burling

I shoot horse sports (including World Cup events) for years now...NEVER seen a mirrorles camera in the hands of a press or horse photographer.

The German market in horse sports event area is clearly dominated by Canon. Considering this fact, I have to agree @Andrew Reid, saying Canon missed some good chances...It did...Though they offer one of the most reliable video AF methods at the moment, they missed the opportunity to get the Canon photographers - using their DSLRs - into their "video boat". 

OK, there is a big separation in Germany between photo and video journalism, but still...Canon did nothing to inspire or to educate Canon DSLR owners to shoot video. The MJPEG codec is for 99,9 % of my colleagues BS, they simply don't have the computering power to edit this kind of footage and most of them simply refuse to handle this big amount of data...

WC_LP_17_W.jpg

@Andrew Reid

Yes, there is a separation between "pro" journalism and prosumer/enthusiasts oriented market. But - as I already said - even the video journalism is in Germany completely in hands of small sensor cameras (broadcast standard, 3CCD, etc.). Canon XF200 --> 305, etc. rule with their overpriced devices and mushy image quality. During the last three months, I've even seen some Sony EX1...

BUT: These facts show too, that the "mirrorless/DSLR video revolution" is more a parallel universe created by loud first movers than a reality nowadays. Dedicated video cameras rule - probably.at max. 3  percent of video market. Rest of video market is ruled by smartphones...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Arikhan said:

@Mattias Burling

I shoot horse sports (including World Cup events) for years now...NEVER seen a mirrorles camera in the hands of a press or horse photographer.

The German market in horse sports event area is clearly dominated by Canon. Considering this fact, I have to agree @Andrew Reid, saying Canon missed some good chances...It did...Though they offer one of the most reliable video AF methods at the moment, they missed the opportunity to get the Canon photographers - using their DSLRs - into their "video boat". 

OK, there is a big separation in Germany between photo and video journalism, but still...Canon did nothing to inspire or to educate Canon DSLR owners to shoot video. The MJPEG codec is for 99,9 % of my colleagues BS, they simply don't have the computering power to edit this kind of footage and most of them simply refuse to handle this big amount of data...

WC_LP_17_W.jpg

Nice shot, Arikhan!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, jonpais said:

Nice shot, Arikhan!

Thanks @jonpais ! I am an enthusiast horse sports shooter and I am riding too - not so much at the moment, because of lack of time. My family breeded show jumping horses for years (now retired) and my mom was years ago local champion in show jumping..."Family enthusiasm", like photography...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again, Canon canoned. No one does it better.

I think Canon is out. And as beautiful as the images are from the C200, it won't be the success they need. They just don't understand the fundamental principle of business (in their video line at least). Produce a product that people want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wish we didn't have to guess at the size of the various markets for cameras.

They vary a lot and even depending on the country or region.

Do small chip camcorders really matter more? Or is it speculative nonsense? Do pro DSLRs make more money than the consumer range? We don't really know.

Personally, I think the mirrorless camera market is very large, and makes a larger turnover for the manufacturers than the pro DSLR market, but with smaller profit margins per unit, therefore they have to achieve enormous scale to make a profit. Perhaps the overall profit is larger from the pro divisions... But again, we are speculating until we know the truth.

The "DSLR video" market, a catch-all term that includes mirrorless cameras, is very large and broad, across a number of different customers from consumers up to pros and even Hollywood, it has a high aspirational quality to it and a lot of the next great DPs and filmmakers will start with these cameras. I'd say it matters beyond the numbers. Canon Japan Corp. would probably disagree.

By the way judging from 7 years of EOSHD visitor stats, the largest market for DSLR video is in the US, by quite some margin. Asia barely registers and it's not just a language thing. Perhaps the local disinterest in filmmaking and video is skewing Canon Japan's judgement. In that case, Canon US should be pushing them a bit harder.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Full ACK...This is a great article @Andrew Reid because it not only shows Canon's failures with the 1DC, but their arrogance and incompetence when it comes to use great market share (their photo DSLRs) to get more people into "Canon based" video production.

20 minutes ago, Andrew Reid said:

Do pro DSLRs make more money than the consumer range? We don't really know

This knowledge would be crucial to estimate coming market development.Personally, I think that a good camera business is only possible in mass markets. Top notch cameras are a small niche market, hard to survive for a manufacturer with a camera centric business only.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Andrew Reid said:

So two things going on here... the market for professional photo journalists and sports shooters... And the market for consumer electronics and televisions.

In the photo journalist market Canon and Nikon rule and it is very hard to break the deadlock, props for Sony to try with the A9 but it's a first effort in a VERY long haul, especially to break the stranglehold of the Canonikon lenses.

 

The odd thing about Sony with that camera is I'm not even really seeing them trying that hard to break in.

I was sure that I'd have seen at least ONE shooter using them at the Champions League final, for example, but there were absolutely none.

Asking around the press room and no one had been approached and offered one which I just found really odd.

So, once again, the only freak shooting on mirrorless for the game itself (a few people use mirrorless for general build up shots) was me ;)

I'd have thought they would have approached us via our national and European press associations offering roadshows or open days or whatever but there's been absolutely nothing.

The resistance wil always be about the glass of course when they do but even so its still surprising.

One thing that is a bit of a misnomer though at least for sports photographers covering pro sports is the concept of a hyrbrid camera.

The rights issues involved for motion versus stills makes it a complete non-starter and its expressly forbidden in our accreditation agreements. Rightly so of course as broadcasters pay literally billions of pounds to cover an event whilst we photographers pay zero ! Putting the camera into Live View mode is enough to set the alarm bells and risk ejection from the event. Its why stills extraction isn't a real thing at pro level either because the very act of filming is forbidden itself irrespective of if you then want to deconstruct it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I work in documentary TV and what I have seen in 5 years is exactly what you are talking about Andrew - a lower/mid budget set up would be C300 and 5Dmk3 and cinema cameras would be sony or arri to now FS7, A7S2 and then a cinema sony or arri.  Canon have LOST a huuuge market with doc makers, everyone is pretty much using FS7s because they are more versatile and shoot beautiful images, they like the A7S2s because they are small, can chuck their EF lenses on it with speedbooster and shoot in crazy low light.  

We had an in house C300 up until recently, but sold it due to it not being used in a year.  We also have a couple of 5Dmk3s and they only get used for stills these days. 

I remember seeing the 1DC on a shoot and thinking how incredible the footage and that this may be how all their cameras would go... but... nope 

I think they got greedy and wanted to push everyone on to their C-1/2/300s, they could have cornered the market! just imagine a 5DC and 1DC line running alongside the still camera lines with all the potential magic lantern unlock .. that massive error twinned with disappointing stills cameras being produced, can't see them keeping their dominance for much longer

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably ended it because sales were too poor to justify continuing to make it. The people who might buy a camera like that were likely buying proper dedicated video cameras, so the whole concept of the 1D C was poorly thought out. Canon management probably thought that people wanted DSLRs to record video after the 5D2 experiment, and then found out that the market the 1D C was aimed at was not into that - DSLR video was primarily the domain of prosumers (amateurs and impoverished "professionals"), who could not afford the 1D C. So they ended it.

As for firmware 2.0, the 1D C and X models are not the same, and have different hardware. It is not the same camera with a "C" tacked on. That would mean that separate firmware would have to be written, and if they had discontinued the model then there would be no payback for committing resources to do that. Hence no firmware.

After they ended the 1D C, they started making the Cxxx cameras, which are also EOS. The 1D C was an intermediate form, an experiment, the Cxxx cameras were the true successors to DSLR video.

Saying that Canon got out of the market is not true, they just took it in a different direction. And if the success of the Cxxx cameras is anything to go by, that decision was probably the right one at the time (which is not to say that it is working out for them now - it is not, since competition is turning MILC into a real alternative).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Andrew Reid said:

The 1DX II is the kid at school who could have been president if only he did his homework.

exactly how I feel. Such potential. 

2 hours ago, gcaus said:

just imagine a 5DC and 1DC line running alongside the still camera lines with all the potential magic lantern unlock .

Ugh. So sad to think of how things could have gone! Rocking a FF 4k 5DC would be amazing

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, tugela said:

They probably ended it because sales were too poor to justify continuing to make it. The people who might buy a camera like that were likely buying proper dedicated video cameras, so the whole concept of the 1D C was poorly thought out.

It's so poorly thought out, with such minimal effort, that the 1D C might have only been a project to fulfil a large Hollywood order or two, before being cancelled and a few more sales picked up in general circulation. Since they'd created this 1D X with a different badge anyway at the request of some high-level movie studios and DPs, I suppose Canon thought they may as well try their luck and put it into the usual pro-video distribution channels, and see how well it would sell...

Not well enough obviously... Because $15k. Then $12k. Then $8k. Then $5k. Then $3k on eBay!

That's how much the market hated this camera.

So rather than pick up the pieces and start again with a new camera aimed at video / stills users, they just threw in the towel entirely circa 2013...

Back then they didn't have the A7S or GH4 for competition let alone the latest Sony and Panasonic monsters.

It was so complacent.

So now they have just gone and stuck 4K on the 1D X Mark II with no LOG and no codec upgrade.

Still complacent.

But now they have major competition, yet the C200 codec debacle leads me to believe Canon remain WAY TOO complacent.

When high profits and number 1 spot are pretty much taken for granted, very bad things start to happen to large companies... Look at Kodak, look at Adobe (subscription model has made them so lazy, Premiere's reliability is virtually falling apart at the seems). Look at GoPro. You might even be right in suggesting Apple are experiencing canoneering-related problems as well although it isn't close to showing in their bottom line yet.

24 minutes ago, tugela said:

As for firmware 2.0, the 1D C and X models are not the same, and have different hardware. It is not the same camera with a "C" tacked on.

They changed one jack... That's about it on the hardware front.

They might even be exactly the same in firmware terms, with the switch for 4K simply disabled on the 1D X (would be the most cost effective way)

I don't believe the heat-sink story from Canon reps as the 1D C doesn't weigh enough extra over the 1D X for one to be included and there's no extra space anyway, also it would have to be mated directly to the chassis to dissipate the heat out of the sealed body. A big design alteration. Nope. All signs point to them being similar enough to make the firmware 2.0 port trivial... but since it was a mainly stills related update, they probably didn't see the point for the 1D C.

24 minutes ago, tugela said:

Cxxx cameras were the true successors to DSLR video.

True. But Canon will soon find out the hard way that they're not the ONLY successors.

24 minutes ago, tugela said:

Saying that Canon got out of the market is not true, they just took it in a different direction. And if the success of the Cxxx cameras is anything to go by, that decision was probably the right one at the time (which is not to say that it is working out for them now - it is not, since competition is turning MILC into a real alternative).

They did get out of the enthusiast video market, definitely. 5D2 & 5D3 stock video mode is a long distant memory and would have been even more distant if it wasn't for Magic Lantern!!

They have hurt their pro market from not having the B-cams and brand presence in enthusiast and prosumer DSLR video market.

There's also a bad perception building around the specs, being behind Sony.

There's also a lack of goodwill building towards Canon, from pissed off customers asking why they're not providing what they want.

You can tell with the 5D Mk IV. The reception was dreadful considering how long-awaited it was and how admired the predecessors were.

2 hours ago, gcaus said:

I work in documentary TV and what I have seen in 5 years is exactly what you are talking about Andrew - a lower/mid budget set up would be C300 and 5Dmk3 and cinema cameras would be sony or arri to now FS7, A7S2 and then a cinema sony or arri.  Canon have LOST a huuuge market with doc makers

Yeah pretty much, in the 5D Mark II and III times you definitely didn't spot many Sony or Panasonic cameras. Now they are EVERYWHERE in documentary, tv, etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Arikhan said:

@Andrew Reid

Very interesting, as I take a look on this aspect since beginning of 2017: 11 big events (big political press conferences with 50+ Journalists and filming/broacasting teams, "Bundesliga" - games of the first German soccer league, etc.) on my screen, 99% all dominated mainly by Canon and Nikon on second place. Sony was TWO times in the bag of photo journalists...But in the bag only, the owners didn't want "to rely on them".

Therefore I talked on each event with 30-35 journalists owning a camera about Sony. Even now - as the A9 is released some months and it is without doubt a great camera - German speaking journalists don't use or trust Sony cameras. Interesting: 53 % didn't ever know, that Sony had a new camera for photo journalism (A9)...

As of video, Sony and Pana (small sensor) camcorders or pro broadcasting cameras are leading. I just took a look to my statistic records and I counted 2 C100, three 5D m3 from January 2017 till now for filming...Above this I saw four times people filming with a 1DX m2 or 5D m4. When asked, they told me to film 1080p with their devices.

Personally I think this is due to inertia. Like a giant oil tanker traveling for miles after its engines stop the pro photography world is full of people who don't want to re-invent the wheel because they used Canon and Nikon for years. Some of them started as Canon or Nikon with their dad in the analog film era. They built habits and lenses collection and they have no reasons to change. They are also not very creative  (not an insult for news and sports photographer) and don't need the latest bells and whistles or cutting edge DR. On top of that many agencies just put Canon and Nikon on the shelf for their staff because "that's how it should be"

Personally I think that if Canon continues to release such un-inspiring (5Dmk4) or crooked (6Dmk2) camera, the enthusiast photographer of today who currently pick Sony/Pana/Fuji over Canon will stick to their present choice when they'll become the pro in 5, 10 or 20 years. As Andrew said, a teenager making is first Indie movie with a Sony A or Pana GH will probably prefer to use a FS or EVA as soon as he got the budget.

Canon is only looking in the past, like the Captain on the deck of its powerless tanker ship, still feeling good that is ship is moving forward thanks to its secured (lens hostage) market of news, wedding and sport photographers. However in the back there are smaller ships catching up. But at some point Canon will have to throw more than 4 years old sensors technology and flipping screen to stay up to speed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, BTM_Pix said:

The odd thing about Sony with that camera is I'm not even really seeing them trying that hard to break in.

I was sure that I'd have seen at least ONE shooter using them at the Champions League final, for example, but there were absolutely none.

Asking around the press room and no one had been approached and offered one which I just found really odd.

So, once again, the only freak shooting on mirrorless for the game itself (a few people use mirrorless for general build up shots) was me ;)

I'd have thought they would have approached us via our national and European press associations offering roadshows or open days or whatever but there's been absolutely nothing.

Yes, it's a good job Canon's competition has also made some really bad mistakes, this seems to be the latest one.

They are not doing enough smart things to turn that market around.

Canon and Nikon will continue to rule the pro stills market because Sony and Panasonic simply haven't figured out a way to change the status quo yet.

Part of the problem is the lenses.

It's a tricky one. I can't figure it out myself... still working through the problem in my head before offering any good solutions after years of thinking about it... My current feedback to Sony would be... "Erm, yeah, good luck!"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

×